'Windows 5x More Expensive than Mac OS X'

  • Permalink
  • submit to reddit
  • Email
  • Follow


KILLER article. You won't have to read my usual lecture on the subject. 
Read about it from someone else's point of view:

<http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/660E746C-F388-4AC7-98F5-6CB9515014
72.html>


Windows 5x More Expensive than Mac OS X
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
By Daniel Eran
RoughlyDrafted Magazine

> ... In this article, Ill ignore the software Apple bundles with new Macs and 
> focus only on the actual costs related to keeping the OS up to date, both for 
> Macs and Windows PCs. That includes retail operating system software updates 
> and associated costs.

> ... Each successive major version of Mac OS X has brought significant speed 
> improvements to Mac users� existing hardware.

> At around the same price of my two Mac upgrades, I was less impressed at the 
> upgrade on my ThinkPad. Windows XP was stable, but felt like a minor upgrade. 
> It certainly didn't give me the feel of new hardware the way Mac OS X updates 
> had. If anything, the extra interface fluff just gave my ThinkPad more to do, 
> without really being useful to me.

> By the end of 2003, Microsoft had missed their initial ship date for 
> Longhorn, the next update to Windows XP. The company had started work on 
> Longhorn prior to the release of XP, but had nothing to show for it after 
> three years. At WinHec 2003, Microsoft announced the new Longhorn was delayed 
> but would ship in early 2005.
>  
> In addition to development troubles with Longhorn, mounting security issues 
> with Windows XP required Microsoft to focus on security for its existing 
> product. Microsoft struggled to finish XP Service Pack 2, but didn't deliver 
> it in 2003 either. 


FACTOR #1: Initial cost of each OS, and number of free updates:

> Meanwhile, Apple released nine free updates to Panther.
>
> 2003
> 
>    1. 9 free updates from Apple for Panther, many security updates.
>       Cost: $129.
> 
>    2. 0 services packs for Windows XP, many security updates
>       Cost: $199 upgrade, $299 new; $100 less for limited Home edition.

> The Wall Street Journal reported that Microsoft executives had realized by 
> then that the existing Longhorn project was not going to work.
>
> "Longhorn was irredeemable because Microsoft engineers were building it just 
> as they had always built software. Throughout its history, Microsoft had let 
> thousands of programmers each produce their own piece of computer code, then 
> stitched it together into one sprawling program. Now, Mr. Allchin argued, the 
> jig was up. Microsoft needed to start over."

> Meanwhile, Apple shipped Tiger 10.4 as a major new release, and has issued 
> seven free updates since. The latest version of Mac OS X delivered many of 
> the features promised for Longhorn, which had been officially named Windows 
> Vista.

> Meanwhile, Apple shipped Tiger 10.4 as a major new release, and has issued 
> seven free updates since. The latest version of Mac OS X delivered many of 
> the features promised for Longhorn, which had been officially named Windows 
> Vista.


FACTOR #2: SECURITY

> 2000-2006: Seven Years of Operating System Upgrades
> In retrospect, the cost of operating system upgrades is fairly minimal 
> compared to the utility and performance they provide. Although Microsoft 
> charges twice as much for Windows XP, a more significant factor is the 
> external fees related to working around Window's security problems.
>  
> Maintaining a Windows install is like owning an aging, imported car: the 
> initial sale price pales in comparison to its ongoing maintenance costs. 
> Heres an outline showing how Windows costs users over five times as much as 
> Mac OS X. These numbers arent hypothetical, but rather are based on my own 
> experience, and those of my clients.

> A Mac user since 2000, upgrading to each new version of Mac OS X:
>  
> 
>    1. 
>       $300 in operating system updates, or nearly $400 if purchased at full 
>       retail.
>    2.
>       Three major new releases that significantly improved performance of the 
>       same hardware and introduced new apps.
>    3.
>       Thirty one regular minor updates with bug fixes and new features, in 
>       addition to many security updates.
>    4.
>       No antivirus needed
>    5.
>       No spyware cleaning needed
> 
>    6.
>       Total cost of maintaining Mac OS X software: about $50 a year, or 
>       around $350 since 2000. (Reports of $750 were a mix of Truthiness and 
>       bad math.)

Repeat: $50 per year for Mac maintenance.

> A Professional Windows user since 2000, upgrading at the one opportunity 
> available:
>  
> 
>    1.
>       $200 upgrade to XP Professional, or $300 for a new retail version.
>    2.
>       One major new release that improved reliability but not the performance 
>       of old hardware.
>    3.
>       Two minor service pack updates focused on bugs and security features, 
>       and around fifty security patches since SP2.
>    4.
>       Seven years of AntiVirus 2000 $50, plus $30 for six annual updates = 
>       $230
>    5.
>       Spyware and security cleaning by Geek Squad: a $200 annual servicing 
>       over seven years = $1400
> 
>    6.
>       Total cost of maintaining Windows software: over $250 a year, or more 
>       than $1800 since 2000.

Repeat: $250 per year for Windows maintenance.

> The much lower cost of Mac OS X and Apples far more frequent releases of free 
> updates will be a major selling point next year for users comparing the 
> purchase of a new Mac with Leopard over a new PC with Vista.

Bravo! He got the point.

> Additionally, while Leopard will likely continue to run on the same Macs as 
> Tiger (anything modern enough to have built in Firewire), Vista will require 
> a new PC to run, likely something from the last year and a half.

As expected: Want to use all of Vista's features, such as they are? You 
need a recent PC.

> There are six versions of Vista in all, differentiated by artificial product 
> limitations.

Be sure to read the previous post about the leaked pricing for Vista, 
and gag.

:-D

-- 
Fortune Magazine, 11-29-05: What's your computer setup today?
Frederick Brooks: I happily use a Macintosh. It's not been equalled for ease 
of use, and I want my computer to be a tool, not a challenge.
<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/12/8363107/>
[Frederick Brooks is the author of 'The Mythical Man Month'. He spearheaded 
the movement to modernize computer software engineering in 1975]
0
Reply derekcurrie (1153) 8/30/2006 3:27:34 AM

See related articles to this posting


Completely snipped ... if you can't go back and read it, get a real 
newsreader.

A couple of things.

In the cost per year for Win maintenance, some will be here to say it should 
be zero, as they have no malware software (or non-free) and have no problems. 
That is okay for some people -- heck, I'm now a Maccie, and I don't use such 
protection in Windows either (yes, I know, condom, Haiti, Girl Scouts, I get 
it).

About Vista not running on older/newer machines, Windroids will be all over 
this one. "Will it run?" might be a yes, but "will it suck?" is subjective.

0
Reply no-spam2 (6831) 8/30/2006 4:04:33 AM

"Tim Murray" <no-spam@thankyou.com> stated in post
0001HW.C11A8691000817CCF0182648@newsgroups.bellsouth.net on 8/29/06 9:04 PM:

> Completely snipped ... if you can't go back and read it, get a real
> newsreader.
> 
> A couple of things.
> 
> In the cost per year for Win maintenance, some will be here to say it should
> be zero, as they have no malware software (or non-free) and have no problems.
> That is okay for some people -- heck, I'm now a Maccie, and I don't use such
> protection in Windows either (yes, I know, condom, Haiti, Girl Scouts, I get
> it).
> 
> About Vista not running on older/newer machines, Windroids will be all over
> this one. "Will it run?" might be a yes, but "will it suck?" is subjective.
> 
Anyone not running anti-malware software on Windows is asking for trouble,
but, yes, you can get such software for free.

Then again, if time is of value to you, even it is not free... and if you
run a business it is not free.

-- 
� Different viruses are still different even if in the same "family"
� Dreamweaver and GoLive are professional web development applications
��Dreamweaver, being the #1 pro web design tool, is used by many pros




0
Reply SNIT (24289) 8/30/2006 5:24:40 AM

In article <0001HW.C11A8691000817CCF0182648@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>,
 Tim Murray <no-spam@thankyou.com> wrote:

> Completely snipped ... if you can't go back and read it, get a real 
> newsreader.
> 
> A couple of things.
> 
> In the cost per year for Win maintenance, some will be here to say it should 
> be zero, as they have no malware software (or non-free) and have no problems. 
> That is okay for some people -- heck, I'm now a Maccie, and I don't use such 
> protection in Windows either (yes, I know, condom, Haiti, Girl Scouts, I get 
> it).

No one can stop you from artificially inflating the cost of Windows by 
including unnecessary things. Just don't be surprised when others refuse 
to accept it.

> About Vista not running on older/newer machines, Windroids will be all over 
> this one. "Will it run?" might be a yes, but "will it suck?" is subjective.

This is a really a non-issue. If you have an older PC that's not likely 
to run Vista well you'd probably be better off purchasing a new PC for 
slightly more than the cost of Vista.

Josh
0
Reply jtmckee (1128) 8/30/2006 9:01:29 PM

In article <jtmckee-5A5341.15012930082006@netnews.comcast.net>,
 Josh McKee <jtmckee@rmac.net> wrote:

> > About Vista not running on older/newer machines, Windroids will be all over 
> > this one. "Will it run?" might be a yes, but "will it suck?" is subjective.
> 
> This is a really a non-issue. If you have an older PC that's not likely 
> to run Vista well you'd probably be better off purchasing a new PC for 
> slightly more than the cost of Vista.

No Josh. You have not been doing your reading about Vista. The el cheapo 
crappo PC machines for $499, or whatever junk celeron machine you have 
in mind, are NOT going to run Vista well. No way are you going to get 
any bells and whistles working on the OS. You might as well stick with 
XP. AND I expect an awful lot of people will.

As far as I am concerned, the 'will it suck' question is the same 
question as 'will the PC running it be able to use ALL of Vista's new 
features.'

How many people are going to be satisfied running Vista knowing that 
they are missing part of the show, that they have compromised Vista 
functionality on their machine because it isn't powerful enough?

Which leads to the question 'will Vista suck on ALL PCs?' Considering 
the raft of features that have been dumped from the original project, 
the answer might well be 'yes'. Maybe the original Longhorn might have 
been worth the prices they are asking. What does that say about paying 
the same price for Vista instead?

We already know that the new Internet Explorer is just more of the same 
old sh*t; more proprietary crap built in that breaks Internet standards; 
more security holes that invite malware.

Speaking of security in general, so far the much vaunted improvements in 
Windows security in Vista have yet to show themselves. Instead we have 
Microsoft taking the parasite metaphor even further by offering for pay 
a service to protect your computer from the ramifications of the 
security vulnerabilities they failed to fix themselves in Vista. This is 
extremely SICK stuff they are pulling here. It is unacceptable.

:-P

-- 
Fortune Magazine, 11-29-05: What's your computer setup today?
Frederick Brooks: I happily use a Macintosh. It's not been equalled for ease 
of use, and I want my computer to be a tool, not a challenge.
<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/12/8363107/>
[Frederick Brooks is the author of 'The Mythical Man Month'. He spearheaded 
the movement to modernize computer software engineering in 1975]
0
Reply derekcurrie (1153) 9/3/2006 3:58:16 AM

In article 
<derekcurrie-540C64.00065603092006@syrcnyrdrs-03-ge0.nyroc.rr.com>,
 Derek Currie <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:

> In article <jtmckee-5A5341.15012930082006@netnews.comcast.net>,
>  Josh McKee <jtmckee@rmac.net> wrote:
> 
> > > About Vista not running on older/newer machines, Windroids will be all 
> > > over 
> > > this one. "Will it run?" might be a yes, but "will it suck?" is 
> > > subjective.
> > 
> > This is a really a non-issue. If you have an older PC that's not likely 
> > to run Vista well you'd probably be better off purchasing a new PC for 
> > slightly more than the cost of Vista.
> 
> No Josh. You have not been doing your reading about Vista.

Not only have I read about it I've actually used it. Have you?

> The el cheapo crappo PC machines for $499, or whatever junk celeron machine
> you have in mind, are NOT going to run Vista well.

I've tested it on two systems:

1. A 700MHz Pentium III with 512MB RAM.
2. A 1.7GHz Pentium IV with 1GB RAM.

The first system was completely unusable. Too much swapping. The second 
was an OK performer. Given that both are at minimum four years old, and 
Vista is still beta, I don't see a problem with an entry level PC 
running Vista. Sure these systems won't get the fancy interface but 
that's what you get buying a $300.00 system.

> No way are you going to get any bells and whistles working on the OS.

One has to ask: Do people buying a $300.00 PC want bells and whistles?

> You might as well stick with XP. AND I expect an awful lot of people will.

I haven't even moved to Windows XP. I'm still using Windows 2000. And I 
only see myself upgrading once I buy a new PC. I don't see any real 
value in Vista over what I have now.

> As far as I am concerned, the 'will it suck' question is the same 
> question as 'will the PC running it be able to use ALL of Vista's new 
> features.'

Why are you insisting every PC have to utilize all of Vista's features?

> How many people are going to be satisfied running Vista knowing that 
> they are missing part of the show, that they have compromised Vista 
> functionality on their machine because it isn't powerful enough?

I would hope none because then they bought the wrong system. But that 
would be their fault.

> Which leads to the question 'will Vista suck on ALL PCs?' Considering 
> the raft of features that have been dumped from the original project, 
> the answer might well be 'yes'. Maybe the original Longhorn might have 
> been worth the prices they are asking. What does that say about paying 
> the same price for Vista instead?

I don't see a lot of value in moving to Vista. I think that its resource 
requirements are too high given the "improvements". I can't for the life 
of me figure out why this OS requires a minimum of 512MB of RAM, which 
my testing shows to be completely unusable...but it is beta, for what it 
offers. Personally I won't be moving to it. But if I didn't already have 
a PC then I wouldn't have any issues buying an entry level PC with Vista.

> We already know that the new Internet Explorer is just more of the same 
> old sh*t; more proprietary crap built in that breaks Internet standards; 
> more security holes that invite malware.

Apparently you don't know.

> Speaking of security in general, so far the much vaunted improvements in 
> Windows security in Vista have yet to show themselves. Instead we have 
> Microsoft taking the parasite metaphor even further by offering for pay 
> a service to protect your computer from the ramifications of the 
> security vulnerabilities they failed to fix themselves in Vista. This is 
> extremely SICK stuff they are pulling here. It is unacceptable.

We don't know what the security record of Vista is as it has not been 
field tested. Therefore any conclusions you have are not valid.

Josh
0
Reply jtmckee (1128) 9/3/2006 1:30:11 PM

"Josh McKee" <jtmckee@rmac.net> stated in post
jtmckee-790352.07301103092006@netnews.comcast.net on 9/3/06 6:30 AM:

>> How many people are going to be satisfied running Vista knowing that
>> they are missing part of the show, that they have compromised Vista
>> functionality on their machine because it isn't powerful enough?
> 
> I would hope none because then they bought the wrong system. But that
> would be their fault.

Yeah, they should have just gotten a Mac.  :)

-- 
� Teaching is a "real job"
��The path "~/users/username/library/widget" is not common on any OS
� The term "all widgets" does not specify a specific subgroup of widgets




0
Reply SNIT (24289) 9/3/2006 1:44:39 PM

On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:58:16 GMT, Derek Currie
<derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:

>No Josh. You have not been doing your reading about Vista. The el cheapo 
>crappo PC machines for $499, or whatever junk celeron machine you have 
>in mind, are NOT going to run Vista well. No way are you going to get 
>any bells and whistles working on the OS. You might as well stick with 
>XP. AND I expect an awful lot of people will.
>
>As far as I am concerned, the 'will it suck' question is the same 
>question as 'will the PC running it be able to use ALL of Vista's new 
>features.'

Are you running RC1?  If not, try it before mouthing off, eh?  
0
Reply John2958 (100) 9/8/2006 2:09:50 AM

In article <7bk1g251t69q8opsqs5mfsiib79dinpesn@4ax.com>,
 John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:58:16 GMT, Derek Currie
> <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> >No Josh. You have not been doing your reading about Vista. The el cheapo 
> >crappo PC machines for $499, or whatever junk celeron machine you have 
> >in mind, are NOT going to run Vista well. No way are you going to get 
> >any bells and whistles working on the OS. You might as well stick with 
> >XP. AND I expect an awful lot of people will.
> >
> >As far as I am concerned, the 'will it suck' question is the same 
> >question as 'will the PC running it be able to use ALL of Vista's new 
> >features.'
> 
> Are you running RC1?  If not, try it before mouthing off, eh?

And your pointless comment negates my important point how? All anyone 
has to do is READ the spec requirements for Vista. I'll mouth off all I 
like when I see MS pulling yet another fast one on their used users.

And what are you going to do when my 'will it suck' question is proven 
true in the marketplace and users learn from the lusers that Vista is 
not worth the price for their now legacy hardware? Apologize?

:-P

-- 
Fortune Magazine, 11-29-05: What's your computer setup today?
Frederick Brooks: I happily use a Macintosh. It's not been equalled for ease 
of use, and I want my computer to be a tool, not a challenge.
<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/12/8363107/>
[Frederick Brooks is the author of 'The Mythical Man Month'. He spearheaded 
the movement to modernize computer software engineering in 1975]
0
Reply derekcurrie (1153) 9/16/2006 3:25:39 PM

"Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message 
news:derekcurrie-22B53B.11253816092006@syrcnyrdrs-03-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
>> Are you running RC1?  If not, try it before mouthing off, eh?
>
> And your pointless comment negates my important point how?

Except that your "important point" is wrong.  A $500 PC is more than capable 
of running Vista just fine.   A $500 PC today (NOT a $500 package that 
includes a 17" LCD monitor and color printer!) has plenty of power to run 
Vista.    Hell, I installed Vista on a 1 Ghz P3/ 512 MB RAM machine at work 
for testing our stuff with.   Works fine.   With a better video card (all I 
could scrounge up was a 64 meg Radeon 7500 - which ATI is *not* supporting 
Aero Glass on) I would have all of the eye candy also.

Please learn something before you spout off your "Mac Advocate" bullshit.

Mike

0
Reply no646 (1056) 9/16/2006 3:45:33 PM

In article 
<derekcurrie-22B53B.11253816092006@syrcnyrdrs-03-ge0.nyroc.rr.com>,
 Derek Currie <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:

> In article <7bk1g251t69q8opsqs5mfsiib79dinpesn@4ax.com>,
>  John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:58:16 GMT, Derek Currie
> > <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> > >No Josh. You have not been doing your reading about Vista. The el cheapo 
> > >crappo PC machines for $499, or whatever junk celeron machine you have 
> > >in mind, are NOT going to run Vista well. No way are you going to get 
> > >any bells and whistles working on the OS. You might as well stick with 
> > >XP. AND I expect an awful lot of people will.
> > >
> > >As far as I am concerned, the 'will it suck' question is the same 
> > >question as 'will the PC running it be able to use ALL of Vista's new 
> > >features.'
> > 
> > Are you running RC1?  If not, try it before mouthing off, eh?
> 
> And your pointless comment negates my important point how? All anyone 
> has to do is READ the spec requirements for Vista. I'll mouth off all I 
> like when I see MS pulling yet another fast one on their used users.

Why should anyone take what you say with any credibility if you're 
unwilling to use it?

> And what are you going to do when my 'will it suck' question is proven 
> true in the marketplace and users learn from the lusers that Vista is 
> not worth the price for their now legacy hardware? Apologize?

Define "legacy hardware". I installed Vista RC1 on my 700MHz ThinkPad 
T20 with 512MB of memory. I have to say that I am pleased with its 
performance (given how horrible it was under beta 2). If this system can 
run Vista RC1 reasonably well then I think your referring to some 
considerably older equipment. At which point you'd likely be better off 
buying a new system anyway.

Josh
0
Reply jtmckee (1128) 9/16/2006 4:28:20 PM

On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 15:25:39 GMT, Derek Currie
<derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:

>In article <7bk1g251t69q8opsqs5mfsiib79dinpesn@4ax.com>,
> John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 03:58:16 GMT, Derek Currie
>> <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> >No Josh. You have not been doing your reading about Vista. The el cheapo 
>> >crappo PC machines for $499, or whatever junk celeron machine you have 
>> >in mind, are NOT going to run Vista well. No way are you going to get 
>> >any bells and whistles working on the OS. You might as well stick with 
>> >XP. AND I expect an awful lot of people will.
>> >
>> >As far as I am concerned, the 'will it suck' question is the same 
>> >question as 'will the PC running it be able to use ALL of Vista's new 
>> >features.'
>> 
>> Are you running RC1?  If not, try it before mouthing off, eh?
>
>And your pointless comment negates my important point how? All anyone 
>has to do is READ the spec requirements for Vista. I'll mouth off all I 
>like when I see MS pulling yet another fast one on their used users.
>
>And what are you going to do when my 'will it suck' question is proven 
>true in the marketplace and users learn from the lusers that Vista is 
>not worth the price for their now legacy hardware? Apologize?

Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it?  Try it.
Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you want to
splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us how well
it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
0
Reply John2958 (100) 9/16/2006 5:17:07 PM

In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
 John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:

> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it?  Try it.
> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you want to
> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us how well
> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?

Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put them 
right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll wait...

;-D

-- 
Fortune Magazine, 11-29-05: What's your computer setup today?
Frederick Brooks: I happily use a Macintosh. It's not been equalled for ease 
of use, and I want my computer to be a tool, not a challenge.
<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/12/8363107/>
[Frederick Brooks is the author of 'The Mythical Man Month'. He spearheaded 
the movement to modernize computer software engineering in 1975]
0
Reply derekcurrie (1153) 9/18/2006 2:54:53 AM

"Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message 
news:derekcurrie-CBFB5B.22545217092006@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
> In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
> John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
>
>> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it?  Try 
>> it.
>> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you want 
>> to
>> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us how 
>> well
>> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
>
> Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put them
> right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll wait...
>
> ;-D

Do you really think a PC as spec'd below would be expensive?

A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:

  a.. 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
  b.. 1 GB of system memory.
  c.. Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of 
graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per pixel.
  d.. 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
  e.. DVD-ROM Drive3.
  f.. Audio output capability.
  g.. Internet access capability.
$689 will get you a Dell E521 system that meets or exceeds these Vista 
"Premium Ready" specs, and includes an upgraded 17" UltraSharp flat 
panel monitor.

PROCESSOR   AMD Athlon� 64 3200+
OPERATING SYSTEM   Genuine Windows� XP Media Center Edition 2005
MEMORY    1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
HARD DRIVE   80GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache�
OPTICAL DRIVE   16x DVD+/-RW Drive
MONITORS    17 inch Ultrasharp� 1707FP Digital Flat Panel
VIDEO CARD    256MB NVIDIA Geforce 7300LE TurboCache
SOUND CARD    Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio

Steve


0
Reply steve13 (4870) 9/18/2006 4:02:16 AM

In article <GMGdnUTxSO_Rh5PYnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@comcast.com>,
 "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:

> "Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:derekcurrie-CBFB5B.22545217092006@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
> > In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
> > John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it?  Try 
> >> it.
> >> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you want 
> >> to
> >> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us how 
> >> well
> >> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
> >
> > Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put them
> > right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll wait...
> >
> > ;-D
> 
> Do you really think a PC as spec'd below would be expensive?
> 
> A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
> 
>   a.. 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
>   b.. 1 GB of system memory.
>   c.. Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of 
> graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per pixel.
>   d.. 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
>   e.. DVD-ROM Drive3.
>   f.. Audio output capability.
>   g.. Internet access capability.
> $689 will get you a Dell E521 system that meets or exceeds these Vista 
> "Premium Ready" specs, and includes an upgraded 17" UltraSharp flat 
> panel monitor.
> 
> PROCESSOR   AMD Athlon� 64 3200+
> OPERATING SYSTEM   Genuine Windows� XP Media Center Edition 2005
> MEMORY    1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
> HARD DRIVE   80GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache�
> OPTICAL DRIVE   16x DVD+/-RW Drive
> MONITORS    17 inch Ultrasharp� 1707FP Digital Flat Panel
> VIDEO CARD    256MB NVIDIA Geforce 7300LE TurboCache
> SOUND CARD    Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
> 
> Steve
> 

I'll admit that its a lot of box for the money (if that's what you're 
after), but, Steve, if one doesn't value Windows, then its really not 
much of a bargain is it?
0
Reply gmgraves (7483) 9/18/2006 4:24:26 AM

"George Graves" <gmgraves@pacbell.net> wrote in message 
news:gmgraves-E5A124.21242817092006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <GMGdnUTxSO_Rh5PYnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:
>
>> "Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:derekcurrie-CBFB5B.22545217092006@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
>> > In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
>> > John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it?  Try
>> >> it.
>> >> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you 
>> >> want
>> >> to
>> >> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us how
>> >> well
>> >> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
>> >
>> > Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put them
>> > right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll 
>> > wait...
>> >
>> > ;-D
>>
>> Do you really think a PC as spec'd below would be expensive?
>>
>> A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
>>
>>   a.. 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
>>   b.. 1 GB of system memory.
>>   c.. Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of
>> graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per pixel.
>>   d.. 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
>>   e.. DVD-ROM Drive3.
>>   f.. Audio output capability.
>>   g.. Internet access capability.
>> $689 will get you a Dell E521 system that meets or exceeds these 
>> Vista
>> "Premium Ready" specs, and includes an upgraded 17" UltraSharp flat
>> panel monitor.
>>
>> PROCESSOR   AMD Athlon� 64 3200+
>> OPERATING SYSTEM   Genuine Windows� XP Media Center Edition 2005
>> MEMORY    1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
>> HARD DRIVE   80GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache�
>> OPTICAL DRIVE   16x DVD+/-RW Drive
>> MONITORS    17 inch Ultrasharp� 1707FP Digital Flat Panel
>> VIDEO CARD    256MB NVIDIA Geforce 7300LE TurboCache
>> SOUND CARD    Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
>>
>> Steve
>>
>
> I'll admit that its a lot of box for the money (if that's what you're
> after), but, Steve, if one doesn't value Windows, then its really not
> much of a bargain is it?

Yes, that is true.

Steve


0
Reply steve13 (4870) 9/18/2006 4:38:10 AM

In article <P9CdnR2Nd9Aov5PYnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
 "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:

> "George Graves" <gmgraves@pacbell.net> wrote in message 
> news:gmgraves-E5A124.21242817092006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> > In article <GMGdnUTxSO_Rh5PYnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message
> >> news:derekcurrie-CBFB5B.22545217092006@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
> >> > In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
> >> > John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it?  Try
> >> >> it.
> >> >> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you 
> >> >> want
> >> >> to
> >> >> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us how
> >> >> well
> >> >> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
> >> >
> >> > Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put them
> >> > right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll 
> >> > wait...
> >> >
> >> > ;-D
> >>
> >> Do you really think a PC as spec'd below would be expensive?
> >>
> >> A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
> >>
> >>   a.. 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
> >>   b.. 1 GB of system memory.
> >>   c.. Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of
> >> graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per pixel.
> >>   d.. 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
> >>   e.. DVD-ROM Drive3.
> >>   f.. Audio output capability.
> >>   g.. Internet access capability.
> >> $689 will get you a Dell E521 system that meets or exceeds these 
> >> Vista
> >> "Premium Ready" specs, and includes an upgraded 17" UltraSharp flat
> >> panel monitor.
> >>
> >> PROCESSOR   AMD Athlon� 64 3200+
> >> OPERATING SYSTEM   Genuine Windows� XP Media Center Edition 2005
> >> MEMORY    1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
> >> HARD DRIVE   80GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache�
> >> OPTICAL DRIVE   16x DVD+/-RW Drive
> >> MONITORS    17 inch Ultrasharp� 1707FP Digital Flat Panel
> >> VIDEO CARD    256MB NVIDIA Geforce 7300LE TurboCache
> >> SOUND CARD    Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >
> > I'll admit that its a lot of box for the money (if that's what you're
> > after), but, Steve, if one doesn't value Windows, then its really not
> > much of a bargain is it?
> 
> Yes, that is true.
> 
> Steve

Well, that seems to be the entire bone of contention between the Mac 
advocates here and the Windows advocates. The "Windows fans'" entire 
argument of late is that Macs of the same or similar spec are more 
expensive than Windows boxes. The point that all seem to ignore is that 
Windows is not of any use to Mac advocates, irrespective of how good a 
"bargain" any machine by Dell et al, might be. Your admission above that 
you agree with that point, leads me to the question (and please do not 
misunderstand me, I 'm not trying to be contentious here) of what (if, 
indeed you realize that Mac users don't care one whit about how cheaply 
one can buy a nice Winbox) you expect to prove by posting info like the 
above?
0
Reply gmgraves (7483) 9/18/2006 5:11:17 AM

In article <12go70r93aqk46@news.supernews.com>, "Mike" <no@where.man> 
wrote:

> "Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:derekcurrie-22B53B.11253816092006@syrcnyrdrs-03-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
> >> Are you running RC1?  If not, try it before mouthing off, eh?
> >
> > And your pointless comment negates my important point how?
> 
> Except that your "important point" is wrong.  A $500 PC is more than capable 
> of running Vista just fine.   A $500 PC today (NOT a $500 package that 
> includes a 17" LCD monitor and color printer!) has plenty of power to run 
> Vista.    Hell, I installed Vista on a 1 Ghz P3/ 512 MB RAM machine at work 
> for testing our stuff with.   Works fine.   With a better video card (all I 
> could scrounge up was a 64 meg Radeon 7500 - which ATI is *not* supporting 
> Aero Glass on) I would have all of the eye candy also.
> 
> Please learn something before you spout off your "Mac Advocate" bullshit.

And what exactly are YOU supposed to be Mike? I know: Just another 
troll. So please do us a favor and go masturbate elsewhere.


Sorry folks. I stand by my 'bullshit' important point. The truth well be 
in the telling, and that happens whenever they get the actual final 
release of Vista out on the street and we see what people with the cheap 
and legacy computers think about the Vista resource hog. 

And no, I couldn't care less about playing with RC1 or wasting money on 
one of your cheap (in all respects) PCs. It is nice to hear your stories 
of your experiences, but by no means do I think your stories represent 
what is going to be the reality for the masses when Vista hits town.

I expect one thing: Disappointment.

Thus ends my 'mouthing off' on the subject until such time as the 
commercial release of Vista is more than years delayed, feature stripped 
vaporware.

:-D

-- 
Fortune Magazine, 11-29-05: What's your computer setup today?
Frederick Brooks: I happily use a Macintosh. It's not been equalled for ease 
of use, and I want my computer to be a tool, not a challenge.
<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/12/8363107/>
[Frederick Brooks is the author of 'The Mythical Man Month'. He spearheaded 
the movement to modernize computer software engineering in 1975]
0
Reply derekcurrie (1153) 9/18/2006 5:19:12 AM

"George Graves" <gmgraves@pacbell.net> wrote in message 
news:gmgraves-01C2E2.22111817092006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <P9CdnR2Nd9Aov5PYnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:
>
>> "George Graves" <gmgraves@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>> news:gmgraves-E5A124.21242817092006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
>> > In article <GMGdnUTxSO_Rh5PYnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>> > "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message
>> >> news:derekcurrie-CBFB5B.22545217092006@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
>> >> > In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
>> >> > John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it? 
>> >> >> Try
>> >> >> it.
>> >> >> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you
>> >> >> want
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us 
>> >> >> how
>> >> >> well
>> >> >> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
>> >> >
>> >> > Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put 
>> >> > them
>> >> > right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll
>> >> > wait...
>> >> >
>> >> > ;-D
>> >>
>> >> Do you really think a PC as spec'd below would be expensive?
>> >>
>> >> A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
>> >>
>> >>   a.. 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
>> >>   b.. 1 GB of system memory.
>> >>   c.. Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of
>> >> graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per 
>> >> pixel.
>> >>   d.. 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
>> >>   e.. DVD-ROM Drive3.
>> >>   f.. Audio output capability.
>> >>   g.. Internet access capability.
>> >> $689 will get you a Dell E521 system that meets or exceeds these
>> >> Vista
>> >> "Premium Ready" specs, and includes an upgraded 17" UltraSharp 
>> >> flat
>> >> panel monitor.
>> >>
>> >> PROCESSOR   AMD Athlon� 64 3200+
>> >> OPERATING SYSTEM   Genuine Windows� XP Media Center Edition 2005
>> >> MEMORY    1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
>> >> HARD DRIVE   80GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst 
>> >> Cache�
>> >> OPTICAL DRIVE   16x DVD+/-RW Drive
>> >> MONITORS    17 inch Ultrasharp� 1707FP Digital Flat Panel
>> >> VIDEO CARD    256MB NVIDIA Geforce 7300LE TurboCache
>> >> SOUND CARD    Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
>> >>
>> >> Steve
>> >>
>> >
>> > I'll admit that its a lot of box for the money (if that's what 
>> > you're
>> > after), but, Steve, if one doesn't value Windows, then its really 
>> > not
>> > much of a bargain is it?
>>
>> Yes, that is true.
>>
>> Steve
>
> Well, that seems to be the entire bone of contention between the Mac
> advocates here and the Windows advocates. The "Windows fans'" entire
> argument of late is that Macs of the same or similar spec are more
> expensive than Windows boxes. The point that all seem to ignore is 
> that
> Windows is not of any use to Mac advocates, irrespective of how good a
> "bargain" any machine by Dell et al, might be. Your admission above 
> that
> you agree with that point, leads me to the question (and please do not
> misunderstand me, I 'm not trying to be contentious here) of what (if,
> indeed you realize that Mac users don't care one whit about how 
> cheaply
> one can buy a nice Winbox) you expect to prove by posting info like 
> the
> above?

I was just refuting Mr. Derek Currie's assumption that a Vista ready PC 
could not be had cheaply.

Lately I have seen many more "Mac Fans" trot out the Mac Pro prices 
(again and again) to show how a Dell is more expensive.

Personally I do feel that generally a Mac is a more expensive 
proposition than a PC, but that gap is narrowing. (The resale value is 
also higher, though!) As my last two computer purchases have been Macs 
there were obviously factors that outweighed price.

Steve


0
Reply steve13 (4870) 9/18/2006 5:22:19 AM

"George Graves" <gmgraves@pacbell.net> stated in post
gmgraves-01C2E2.22111817092006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com on 9/17/06 10:11
PM:

>>> I'll admit that its a lot of box for the money (if that's what you're
>>> after), but, Steve, if one doesn't value Windows, then its really not
>>> much of a bargain is it?
>> 
>> Yes, that is true.
>> 
>> Steve
> 
> Well, that seems to be the entire bone of contention between the Mac
> advocates here and the Windows advocates. The "Windows fans'" entire
> argument of late is that Macs of the same or similar spec are more
> expensive than Windows boxes. The point that all seem to ignore is that
> Windows is not of any use to Mac advocates, irrespective of how good a
> "bargain" any machine by Dell et al, might be. Your admission above that
> you agree with that point, leads me to the question (and please do not
> misunderstand me, I 'm not trying to be contentious here) of what (if,
> indeed you realize that Mac users don't care one whit about how cheaply
> one can buy a nice Winbox) you expect to prove by posting info like the
> above?

A couple points, George:

1) I prefer OS X to XP.  For my needs, and, I believe, for the needs of most
non-gamer home users, it is a better system.  XP, however, is also a good
system, and if Apple was pricing OS X machines out of the market that would
be a bad thing.

2) Many users who are looking at computers may be thinking of OS X but not
willing to go there if it comes in a far more expensive package...
especially if on paper the XP machine offers a lot more.

-- 
� Teaching is a "real job"
��The path "~/users/username/library/widget" is not common on any OS
� The term "all widgets" does not specify a specific subgroup of widgets




0
Reply SNIT (24289) 9/18/2006 5:39:53 AM

In article <zY6dnTrDJ-aQsJPYnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
 "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:

> "George Graves" <gmgraves@pacbell.net> wrote in message 
> news:gmgraves-01C2E2.22111817092006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> > In article <P9CdnR2Nd9Aov5PYnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "George Graves" <gmgraves@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> >> news:gmgraves-E5A124.21242817092006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> >> > In article <GMGdnUTxSO_Rh5PYnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> >> > "Steven de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Derek Currie" <derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote in message
> >> >> news:derekcurrie-CBFB5B.22545217092006@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
> >> >> > In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
> >> >> > John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it? 
> >> >> >> Try
> >> >> >> it.
> >> >> >> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you
> >> >> >> want
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us 
> >> >> >> how
> >> >> >> well
> >> >> >> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put 
> >> >> > them
> >> >> > right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll
> >> >> > wait...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ;-D
> >> >>
> >> >> Do you really think a PC as spec'd below would be expensive?
> >> >>
> >> >> A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
> >> >>
> >> >>   a.. 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
> >> >>   b.. 1 GB of system memory.
> >> >>   c.. Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of
> >> >> graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per 
> >> >> pixel.
> >> >>   d.. 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
> >> >>   e.. DVD-ROM Drive3.
> >> >>   f.. Audio output capability.
> >> >>   g.. Internet access capability.
> >> >> $689 will get you a Dell E521 system that meets or exceeds these
> >> >> Vista
> >> >> "Premium Ready" specs, and includes an upgraded 17" UltraSharp 
> >> >> flat
> >> >> panel monitor.
> >> >>
> >> >> PROCESSOR   AMD Athlon� 64 3200+
> >> >> OPERATING SYSTEM   Genuine Windows� XP Media Center Edition 2005
> >> >> MEMORY    1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
> >> >> HARD DRIVE   80GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst 
> >> >> Cache�
> >> >> OPTICAL DRIVE   16x DVD+/-RW Drive
> >> >> MONITORS    17 inch Ultrasharp� 1707FP Digital Flat Panel
> >> >> VIDEO CARD    256MB NVIDIA Geforce 7300LE TurboCache
> >> >> SOUND CARD    Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
> >> >>
> >> >> Steve
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I'll admit that its a lot of box for the money (if that's what 
> >> > you're
> >> > after), but, Steve, if one doesn't value Windows, then its really 
> >> > not
> >> > much of a bargain is it?
> >>
> >> Yes, that is true.
> >>
> >> Steve
> >
> > Well, that seems to be the entire bone of contention between the Mac
> > advocates here and the Windows advocates. The "Windows fans'" entire
> > argument of late is that Macs of the same or similar spec are more
> > expensive than Windows boxes. The point that all seem to ignore is 
> > that
> > Windows is not of any use to Mac advocates, irrespective of how good a
> > "bargain" any machine by Dell et al, might be. Your admission above 
> > that
> > you agree with that point, leads me to the question (and please do not
> > misunderstand me, I 'm not trying to be contentious here) of what (if,
> > indeed you realize that Mac users don't care one whit about how 
> > cheaply
> > one can buy a nice Winbox) you expect to prove by posting info like 
> > the
> > above?
> 
> I was just refuting Mr. Derek Currie's assumption that a Vista ready PC 
> could not be had cheaply.
> 
> Lately I have seen many more "Mac Fans" trot out the Mac Pro prices 
> (again and again) to show how a Dell is more expensive.
> 
> Personally I do feel that generally a Mac is a more expensive 
> proposition than a PC, but that gap is narrowing. (The resale value is 
> also higher, though!) As my last two computer purchases have been Macs 
> there were obviously factors that outweighed price.
> 
> Steve

Thank you.
0
Reply gmgraves (7483) 9/18/2006 6:24:43 AM

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 02:54:53 GMT, Derek Currie
<derekcurrie@mac.com.invalid> wrote:

>In article <k9cog2lcsoqijdte8n2nplavsl30liehd2@4ax.com>,
> John Smith <john@smith.com> wrote:
>
>> Your point isn't correct, so what's the point in refuting it?  Try it.
>> Get a cheap $250 PC (or a $539 Dell Core 2 Duo desktop, if you want to
>> splurge), add some RAM to take it to a gig or so, and tell us how well
>> it works.  RC1 is free.  What are you waiting for?
>
>Post the specs of your cheap crap PC, mentioned above, and put them 
>right next to the spec recommendations for Vista. Go on. I'll wait...

Post the specs for Vista, then look at what GotApex shows for the Dell
9200 desktop at $539.  
0
Reply John2958 (100) 9/19/2006 3:25:19 AM
comp.sys.mac.advocacy 32548 articles. 1 followers. Post

21 Replies
85 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 5


  • Permalink
  • submit to reddit
  • Email
  • Follow


Reply:

Similar Artilces:

'Windows 5x More Expensive than Mac OS X'
KILLER article. You won't have to read my usual lecture on the subject. Read about it from someone else's point of view: <http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/660E746C-F388-4AC7-98F5-6CB9515014 72.html> Windows 5x More Expensive than Mac OS X Tuesday, August 15, 2006 By Daniel Eran RoughlyDrafted Magazine > ... In this article, Ill ignore the software Apple bundles with new Macs and > focus only on the actual costs related to keeping the OS up to date, both for > Macs and Windows PCs. That includes retail operating system software updates > and associated cos...

misc.forsale.computers.discussion,comp.lang.basic.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.graphics,comp.os.ms-windows.pre-release
misc.forsale.computers.discussion,comp.lang.basic.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.graphics,comp.os.ms-windows.pre-release comp.sys.mac.graphics,comp.os.misc,alt.alien.research,comp.unix.user-friendly,comp.os.linux.portable > > > later bE8mb > > > kjvoa bE8mb > > > hehe bE8mb > > > disrupt bE8mb > > > orgaization bE8mb > > > jere bE8mb > > > ressapac bE8mb > > > amend bE8mb > > > injection bE8mb > > > anguish bE8mb > > > isparitjsya bE8mb > > > subscription bE8mb > >...

Mac Classic, OS, OS X vs. Windows all versions
This topic may have been discussed ad infinitum on this group - haven't had time to check all the archives. I've seen a lot of name-calling and arguing back and forth, read about how both Windows and Mac OS X are old and tired and need to be revised -now I'd like to see some reasoned arguments - Please fact-based opinions in lay terms as well as high-end analysis of how each OS is designed, coded, built, how they operate, strengths and weaknesses, ease of use, long-term predictions based on system integrity and structure. I'm not a programmer, but I'd like at leas...

Remove the Mac Engine (Two versions Windows & Mac OS)
Dear Support - Can you please in the next upgraded release two versions : RB for Windows Professional and RB for Mac OS and remove in the Windows versions all the Mac OS also the engine. They slowly your executable files. - Can you please decrease the upgrade price. I will not paying for the Combined version only for RealBASIC Professional for Windows and NOT for Mac OS. Give me any feedback RB Support "-" <Stefke27_BE740126@pandora.be> wrote in message <news:COAJb.112797$wc5.5289021@phobos.telenet-ops.be>... > Dear Support > > - Can y...

Mac OS Up, Windows Down
Information Week http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/mac/showArticle.jhtml?articl eID=213000498 Are they biased too? -- Bob Robt. Brogan wrote: > Information Week > > http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/mac/showArticle.jhtml?articl > eID=213000498 > > Are they biased too? Information Week? I don't know. This is just yet another post of the same Net Applications data. Steve "Robt. Brogan" <rbrogan@think.biz> wrote in message news:rbrogan-45E505.21394103022009@nntp.teranews.com... > Information Week > > http://www.inf...

Sending PhotoShop7 jpg attachments from Mac OSX to Windows or Mac OS 9 users
I am running Mac OSX.2, creating jpgs from psds in PhotoShop 7, and attaching them in emails to both PC & Mac OS 9-using clients, who are reporting having trouble opening them. I'm also exploring whether the problem might be with my email software (Entourage), but I thought I'd check with other PS 7 users running OS X.2, and see if anyone else has had this problem. I'd appreciate any help anyone could gve me on this. Steve For starters, make sure you only use a 3 letter suffix such as JPG, not JPEG, or TIF not TIFF. -- Ron. Steve Garvey <sgarvey@lava.net> wrote in ...

Running Windows Apps on mac os x without booting Windows XP: soon ! ( ?)
subject: Mac os x on intel machines:---> WINE on Mac os X ?? Since wine is unix/ linux, and runs windows apps, I suppose it will be possible to run windows apps on mac os x-intel, without the windows OS. Is there somebody aware of this / working on the project ?? (a port) Thanks, Marc -----PS---- Apple says: The blue & White is supported for OS X. �It is not true. � The rev A poses problems ... http://users.fulladsl.be/spb13810/apple/ Apple phished me into a lots of lost time, lost money and lost credentials... -- een appeltje te schillen met http://users.fulladsl.be/spb1...

Help needed : Mac OS X & OS 9.x and Windows-Server
Until now we are using different Mac's running OS 9.1 and 9.2 and save our files on a Windows 2000 Server via MacServerIP (AFP over IP). In the next time we like to upgrade to OS X. Our problem: Files saved on the Server from OS 9 via AFP will be recognized by OS X as "Document" without application information. I tried to connect the Server via SMB and otherwise via AFP. When I manually used AFP ("afp://<servername>") the volume becomes visible, but if I try to select on file the file will be go away. Next time I connect to the volume the file is visible again. U...

How to set a pop-up new window rather than parent window highlig hted from ListCtrl on Mac OS
Hi, I use Listctrl and from clicking a row on it a child window is poped up. On Mac OS, however, the child window is not highlighted ( newly created Childe window is on top of the parent window Listctrl on Win32 or Linux) i.e., parent window Listctrl is highlighted and is on top of newly created child window. How can I have a child window that is poped up from parent Listctrl be on top Of the parent window ? Many thanks ming --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: wx-users-unsubscribe@lists.wxwidgets.org For addit...

Looking for a Windows Developer, with prior experience porting Application developed for Mac OS platform to Windows. Location: CA.
Our Fortune 500 client is looking for a Windows Developer, with prior exper= ience porting Application developed for Mac OS platform to Windows. Preferr= ed skills C, Windows IDE and any knowledge of Graphics (big plus). Excellen= t opportunity to work with a pioneer in technology industry.=20 Please send resume at ngupta@mindlanc.com Thanks, Nitin Gupta 732-201-7856 On 24/10/2012 15:48, Nitin Gupta wrote: > Excellent opportunity to work with a pioneer in technology industry. Funny how every company seems to be a "pioneer in technology industry". Also, it's...

Windows and Mac OS and Filemaker
I developed a ad production database for a company who uses exclusively Macs. I developed the db on a Mac as well. (actually all of the FM db work I do is on the Mac). I'm currently working out of town and the company would like some changes to the db. All I have is a laptop running Windows XP. It used to be that FM dbs were reasonably interchangable from Mac toWindows platforms. Is this still the case? Any pitfalls? FM 7 Thanks pc pcourterelle <someone@ms.com> wrote: > It > used to be that FM dbs were reasonably interchangable from Mac toWindows > platforms. I...

Windows down, Mac OS X...
up! <http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9> -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> In article <alangbaker-8F5075.21432931082008@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > up! > > <http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9> Barely! "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-8F5075.21432931082008@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net... > up! Still at May levels - but you know that. Alan, can't...

from Windows to Mac OS X
I have Eudora 5.1 on a Windows PC, and I have to transfer mails on a Mac G5 with Mac OS X 10.3.4 and Eudora 6.1. Where is the "mail folder" in the PC files hierarchy ? What is the good way to proceed ? -- F. Jacquemin In article <1gh3kwu.17wit2g8htvjoN%fr_jacqu@club-internet.fr>, fr_jacqu@club-internet.fr (Fran�ois Jacquemin) wrote: > I have Eudora 5.1 on a Windows PC, and I have to transfer mails on a Mac > G5 with Mac OS X 10.3.4 and Eudora 6.1. Where is the "mail folder" in > the PC files hierarchy ? What is the good way to proceed ? S...

Mac OS X LookAndFeel on Windows
Hi, I'm programming on a Windows XP platform but I'm trying to use a Mac LookAndFeel. Exception first: the Win "src.zip" doesn't contain the package "com.sun.java.swing.plaf.mac.MacLookAndFeel". :-( I know, that isn't possibile because of the copyright but, maybe, it isn't a bad idea import the "com.sun.java.swing.plaf.mac.MacLookAndFeel". After that I can try to make a code like this: Properties p = System.getProperties(); p.put("os.name", "Mac"); // I'm not sure, it's to clear some restriction o...

Mac OS X and Windows printers?
After literally decades of hesitation about leaving the Windows world, I finally took the plunge and bought a MacBook yesterday. Everything is great so far, except for one thing: It appears that I won't be able to print to a fairly expensive Konica-Minolta 2300 color laser printer I bought last year. The printer is currently hanging off a Windows XP machine, and I'm able to print to it from other Windows machines on the same network. The MacBook is even able to "see" the printer's name on the network. But looking at the docs for the printer, it claims to be a strictl...

floating toplevel windows on Mac OS
Hi, I'm trying to get a balloon help widget working on a Mac OS X system running TclTk Aqua BI 8.4.6.1. My problem is well-known (I think): The toplevel window that is used to display balloon help "steals" the focus. I've seen documentation around recommending the use of the "unsupported1" & "wm attributes -style" commands, but neither appears to be implemented. Has anyone had any success getting balloon help widgets working in a similar environment? Any pointers/help muchly appreciated. SCoTT. :) > I've seen documentation around recommen...

console window on Mac OS X
Dear Java Pros, I would like to implement a simple console window based on JTextPane (or similar) to emit Unix shell commands on Mac OS X. While I have found reasonable examples how to implement the GUI part, I have severe trouble in redirecting the input stream provided from the console window. I am using code like this: public ConsoleInThread(InputStream istream) { super(); is= istream; isr= new InputStreamReader(is); br= new BufferedReader(isr); } public void run() { try { while ((li...

Windows apps moving to the Mac OS
http://tinyurl.com/39fkem From Beta News. -- Jim "Jim" <jim@NOSpaMync.net> wrote in message news:jim-6C8D1C.18083017012008@comcast.dca.giganews.com... > http://tinyurl.com/39fkem > > From Beta News. "This, in spite of the vaunted Windows/Mac cross-platform capabilities of Apple's new Leopard operating system. And regardless of Mac fans' claims of relative security versus Windows, some of the new products for Mac OS are geared toward virus protection and Web filtering." LOL! "PC Guy" <pcguy@hotmail.com> stated in post 34Sd...

Mac OS X LookAndFeel on Windows
Hi, I'm programming on a Windows XP platform but I'm trying to use a Mac LookAndFeel. Exception first: the Win "src.zip" doesn't contain the package "com.sun.java.swing.plaf.mac.MacLookAndFeel". :-( I know, that isn't possibile because of the copyright but, maybe, it isn't a bad idea import the "com.sun.java.swing.plaf.mac.MacLookAndFeel". After that I can try to make a code like this: /********************************************************************************/ Properties p = System.getProperties(); p.put("os.na...

Windows 7 copies Mac OS.
http://www.pcr-online.biz/features/328/Microsofts-new-vision Quoting Microsoft's partner group manager, Simon Aldous "One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it�s very graphical and easy to use. What we�ve tried to do with Windows 7 � whether it�s traditional format or in a touch format � is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics. We�ve significantly improved the graphical user interface, but it�s built on that very stable core Vista technology, which is far more stable than the current Mac platfor...

Metail Window in Mac OS X
This might seem like a silly question but... I have created a small little app (on my Windows machine). I have set the main window to metal so that it will use a metal background under Mac OS X. When I run the app on the Mac there is a white outline around the index tab that looks really bad. It seems that the index tab control is a box shape. Even if I put a canvas behind the index tab it is still a box shape and there is grey around the edges. I have looked through the documentation, etc., but can't find out any information on how to get rid of this. In other...

Format iPod for windows using Mac OS?
I understand that the iPod drive can be formatted in MS-DOS or Mac OS formats, and that a Mac can read/write both but a PC can only access the MS-DOS format. Can you set up an iPod to use MS-DOS without access to a PC at the time of formatting the drive (to allow subsequent use with a PC), and if so how? Thanks. ...

[News] A Windows, Mac OS, and Linux Overview
Windows vs MAC OS X & Linux ,----[ Quote ] | Then Linux came to the talking. The open source Operating System. | In 1983, Richard Stallman founded the GNU Project, with the goal of making | an unique unlike-UNIX OS full of free software. By the end of 1990's, | almost components of the system were made, but the core was missing: | the kernel. `---- http://mwmarticles.blogspot.com/2006/07/windows-vs-mac-os-x-linux.html (Posted owing to recently) ...

Can Intel Macs run ANY Windows OS?
Just wondering if the Intel Macs can run any Windows OS or just XP. Thanks. ridergroov wrote: > Just wondering if the Intel Macs can run any Windows OS or just XP. > Thanks. Allegedly they can, however the Boot Camp utility will only currently install XP SP2. There is a program called Parallels which allows a user to apparently run any version of windows or another OS in a window within OSX. Okay gotcha. I would probably want to run Boot Camp. Do any of the Intel Macs run XP? Does it matter if I bought an iMac or a Mac Pro as far as running windows is concerned? jayzenden@gma...

Why Mac OS X Is Superior to Linux and Windows
By Matt Hartley, OS Weekly Wednesday, 16 August 2006 "OS X offers some of the best integration of software tools that I have seen anywhere. Hey, Linux is great and both OS' share a little history with the whole Unix/BSD scene, but in the end, OS X works much easier when dealing with more advanced needs." http://www.osweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2295&It emid=449 Mojo wrote: > By Matt Hartley, OS Weekly > Wednesday, 16 August 2006 > > "OS X offers some of the best integration of software tools that I have > seen anywh...